VOYEURISM What's Next?

Catherine Crump gives a Ted Talk about license plate readers and what that our local police department, and the federal government is doing with this stored data. Catherine's speech shows one of Larson's Cultural Images and Myths, the myth is the presence of conspiracy. Catherine wants her audience to believe that storing this data will lead to the data being, "abused, maybe for blackmail, maybe for political advantage, or maybe for simple voyeurism."

What caught my attention to this conspiracy was the word voyeurism. Merriam-Webster.com defines voyeurism in two ways: first, "one obtaining sexual gratification from observing unsuspecting individuals who are partly undressed, naked, or engaged in sexual acts; broadly: one who habitually seeks sexual stimulation by visual means." This definition shocked me, how could someone interpret the act of storing data to lead to voyeurism? I decided to give Catherine the benefit of the doubt and go with Merriam-Webster's second definition, "a prying observer who is usually seeking the sordid or the scandalous." Although it is not quite as drastic, it is still quite shocking that one would think the storing of data could lead one to believe in this result.

I'm not saying that Catherine's speech does not shed light on, what most would consider, an infringement on our right to privacy. I am not here to debate the right to privacy or whether or not data should be stored at all. I am here to point out the presence of conspiracy that exists in her argument. Catherine is taking what could be a small situation, that could be meant to keep us safe, and turns it into something of greater risk. The situation thus is escalated from safety of the public to the public’s lack of safety and privacy, hence the presence of conspiracy.

Catherine is using scare tactics. The firsts process premise would describe these scare tactics through Maslow's Hierarchy of needs, with our need to feel safe, and Packard's "Compelling Needs", emotional security. Catherine wants her audience to feel unsafe due to the collection of this data, by the government. She wants her audience to feel that their emotional security and safety are in jeopardy and does this by using the second process premise of fear.

Catherine starts her speech by comparing the collection of this data to what took place in Ferguson Missouri with the death Michael Brown. Catherine compared the surveillance equipment that collects this data, to advanced battlefield weapons and equipment used in war. Catherine's comparisons bring the second process premise of fear immediately into the conversation.

Catherine attempts to create fear are too far stretched to making one believe that voyeurism could take place. However, Catherine's use of the process premise will make us think differently about the collection of data in the future. She does create a cognitive affect in her audience that is brought on by the presence of conspiracy. I do feel, on the negative side, that this speech nurtures the distrust of government that is growing in our society. More positively the speech will encourage us all to possibly ask more questions.

Catherine's purpose in her speech might just be that, to make us think and ask. Catherine probably wants us all to be a little less trusting of what the government tells us. That we should all be more involved with what is going on in our communities, making sure it is the right thing for us all. I would say Catherine's usage of the process premise succeeded in creating the cognitive effect of influencing a change in the way we look and think at this situation.